Much Ado About Criterion Two: Does Anyone Care?
Abstract
There are two review criteria used in assessing proposals submitted to the National Science Foundation. The first criterion has been in place for many years and asks the reviewers to comment on the "intellectual merit of the proposed activity." The second criterion, established in 1997, asks reviewers to address the "broader impacts of the proposed activity". With four years of the new criteria in place, there is debate on how much impact the second criterion has had on both the writing of proposals and the review and funding decision processes. This panel discussion will provide a history of the evolution of the review criteria, including the impetus for the 1997 changes, the intent of the changes, and the desired outcomes in science research and education resulting from the changes. Implementation of the new review criteria from the Geosciences Directorate at NSF will be discussed and illustrative impacts of the effect of the criteria will be presented. Suggestions for various proposal elements that can satisfy criterion 2 will be given.
- Publication:
-
AGU Spring Meeting Abstracts
- Pub Date:
- May 2002
- Bibcode:
- 2002AGUSMED31B..01A
- Keywords:
-
- 6605 Education;
- 6610 Funding